APPENDIX 16
Memorandum submitted by the Malta Press
Club
I write on behalf of the Malta Press Club, Malta's
national association of journalists. We have heard about your
Committee's inquiry into the Press Complaints Commission and privacy
matters and thought that our perspective might be of some value,
especially as Malta has recently hosted the fourth annual conference
of the Alliance of Independent Press Councils of Europe.
Our organisation was established in 1989 and
more recently, in 1996, we set up an independent body called the
Press Ethics Commission, which is a self-regulatory body designed
to deal with complaints from members of the public and matters
of journalistic ethics.
The Commission is currently headed by Chief
Justice Emeritus Professor Giuseppe Mifsud Bonnici, who also has
experience as a judge at the European Court of Justice. Other
members include a historian, a dentist, three former journalists
and a lawyer, all of who give of their time voluntarily.
The following submission seeks to explain why
we believe self regulation of the press to be the best form of
regulation, how that belief seems to be spreading around Europe
and also how the PCC in the UK has played a major part in demonstrating
how self-regulation can work successfully.
SUBMISSION TO
THE SELECT
COMMITTEE INQUIRY
INTO THE
PRESS COMPLAINTS
COMMISSION
The Maltese Code of Ethics states that "freedom
of the media is one of the foundations of a modern, democratic
society. It incorporates the right of freedom of speech, the right
to freely disseminate information and the right to receive this
same information". However, we recognise that "these
rights are not unlimited" because the public too have their
own rights. We believe, therefore, that "it is desirable
that the media, aware of its responsibilities and obligations
towards the rest of society, regulates itself through a self-disciplinary
system".
As such, the Press Ethics Commission is one
of a growing number of organisations in Europe and elsewhere responsible
for the self-regulation of the press. Many countries are learning
that the answer to the old problem of how to keep the press free
but responsible lies in effective self-regulation. No press can
be free if it is supervised by anyone, be it by parliament or
the courts—and such an idea would strike fear into the minds
of those Eastern European democracies who are currently exploring
self-regulation as the only feasible way of regulating the press.
We have learned from the numerous meetings of
the Alliance of Independent Press Councils of Europe (AIPCE) that
self-regulation is a flexible concept that has been tailored to
meet the needs of different sized countries with differing cultures.
How else could the same idea work as well in Malta as it does
in the UK?
As the most recent hosts of the AIPCE conference,
it might be useful for you to have the following information to
hand, as I am not sure if others will provide it:
— AIPCE is a loose-knit group of self-regulatory
European press councils, which meets every year to discuss matters
of mutual interest such as privacy, complaints handling, regulation
of the internet and so on.
— Participating organisations also
share information about how to improve their service to the public.
— They are willing to give help, through
advice, training and other practical measures those countries
who wish to establish self-regulatory bodies. I understand that
the PCC in the UK is especially active in this area and it is
well known that they have helped significantly in the creation
of the Bosnian Press Council.
— There are only two countries in Europe—France
and Ireland—that do not have self-regulatory mechanisms
for dealing with complaints quickly and cheaply from members of
the public. In Ireland there are real efforts to get this position
to change.
— Increasingly there are requests by
third parties to be observers at AIPCE conferences because experts
from the whole of Europe are gathered in one place.
— We also learn from our discussions
that attacks on self-regulation in AIPCE members' countries are
inevitably used by opponents of self-regulation in other countries
where it would be most desirable to have it. Self-regulation underpins
freedom of expression, and there are many people in other countries
who have a vested interested in suppressing it. What better ammunition
is there for those detractors than simply to point to critics
of self-regulation in those countries where it already exists?
— The following countries or regions
attend AIPCE meetings and have self-regulatory complaints mechanisms
that are free from government or judicial supervision: Austria;
Belgium; Bosnia-Herzegovina; Catalonia; Cyprus; Denmark; Holland;
Estonia; Finland; Germany; Hungary; Iceland; Italy; Lithuania;
Luxembourg; Malta; Norway; Sweden; Switzerland and the UK.
Our own links with the PCC in the UK are particularly
strong, not least because of the obvious historical links and
our membership of the Commonwealth. Indeed, we have been involved
in a recent series of seminars that were organised by the Commonwealth
Press Union and funded by the British Foreign and Commonwealth
Office with the PCC's support in which we had some interesting
and useful discussions.
In fact, we hope to strengthen our links with
the PCC in the future. In particular, we hope that we will have
a conference with its representatives in order to exchange views
on certain practices and to discuss redrafting and refining policy
papers. There is no doubt in our minds that, although the circumstances
of the UK and Malta are vastly different, our two systems of self-regulation
can learn from each other. The way in which the PCC handles complaints
is admirable—especially given how many complaints it receives—and
the support and advice it has given to its European partners is
subtle and yet crucial. The new website for Press Councils (www.presscouncils.org),
which has been set up by the PCC in partnership with Professor
Bertrand is an excellent centre for exchanging views and information.
To end we would reiterate our absolute belief
in the ideal of press self-regulation and in its practical operation.
The PCC in the UK is one of the most important and successful
models of such regulation in practice and we have been delighted
to be involved with its work through AIPCE, a body which has grown
from strength to strength as self-regulation continues its spread
through the continent.
16 January 2003
| 
